Who are we licensed to hate now?

The Supreme Court, in today's approval of President Trump's Muslim Ban, and in decisions over the last few weeks, is giving us prompts about who we are permitted, even urged and required, to hate.

During the campaign, Trump trumpeted the lie that "Islam hates us" and promised "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States." The Supremes say sure: hatred toward 1.8 million Muslims worldwide is a fine, civil sentiment, however much obscuring bilge government lawyers may have spread over Trump's "animus."

Meanwhile, those same judges refused to apply elementary public accommodations standards -- the rule that if you run a public business you have to serve the public without discrimination -- to a Colorado baker with a religious objection to same sex marriages. You see, some Colorado human rights bureaucrat said something insensitive about right-wing Christian intolerance and that is impermissible "animus."

It's just fine to hate Muslims, but don't criticize bigoted forms of Christianity. Those are the rules for this Supreme Court. With a conservative majority of justices, things are likely to get worse, not better.***The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) writes in a very American way about how bigotry is embedded in our history -- and how such bigotry ends in shame.

The Supreme Court has permitted the slavery of African Americans, the incarceration of Japanese Americans, and today it permitted the banning of Muslims.

We know what America's history is. Together, we aspire toward something better.

The fight does not end today. We will continue even despite the Trump administration's bigotry and the Court's permission of it.

When the courts fail, they must hear from citizens in the streets and at the ballot box.